ReachBack by BuiltIntelligence - Recent questions tagged nec3https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/tag/nec3
Powered by Question2AnswerNEC ECC: Works Information and assumptions made at tenderhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17087/nec-ecc-works-information-and-assumptions-made-at-tender
NEC3 ECC Main Option A.<br />
<br />
As part of the tender submission the Contractor has stipulated many clarifications and assumptions on which they based their total tender of the Prices. This was clearly referenced in the form of agreement and forms part of the Contract under an appendix.<br />
<br />
A drawing in the Works Information did not specify an actual depth for the excavation, but did specify 'within 1 metre' of an asset. The Contractor clarified what depth they were going to excavate to and based their Prices on their own depth. The assumed depth later turned out to be 30% deeper than the Contractor's clarification. Would this amount to a Compensation Event? i.e. does the Contractor's tender clarification stand contractually or has the WI not changed?<br />
<br />
Furthermore, the condition of the asset that was being excavated around (in the same excavation) turned out to be in poor condition. Therefore, as the soil was disturbed, additional damage was naturally caused to the asset. The Contractor has clarified in the tender that they were not taking responsibility for the condition of this asset as a clarification. Again, would the clarification stand and the Contractor be entitled to a Compensation Event?Generalhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17087/nec-ecc-works-information-and-assumptions-made-at-tenderThu, 21 Mar 2019 06:04:36 +0000NEC ECS: Risk allocation with Contractor provided servicehttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17072/nec-ecs-risk-allocation-with-contractor-provided-service
As Contractor on an NEC3 ECS Option B contract, one of the attendances we provide is 'setting out' on behalf of the subcontractor. 'Setting out' is not defined further than that. The works are formwork and reinforced concrete works.<br />
<br />
Does this change the subcontractors requirement to comply with 20.1? Could it be inferred from that clause that the risk of an error in setting out still lies with the subcontractor, as if the wall is at the wrong level, for example, they have not provided the works in accordance with the WI.<br />
<br />
There is no risk relating to setting out that is stated in the subcontract as a Contractors Risk (as per 60.1 (14)) and I cannot see what other event it may be notified under?NEC3 and NEC4 Contractshttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17072/nec-ecs-risk-allocation-with-contractor-provided-serviceMon, 18 Mar 2019 19:55:36 +0000NEC ECS: Option A - Procedure for a sub-contractor to terminate contract due to insolvencyhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17059/option-procedure-contractor-terminate-contract-insolvency
Due to the Main Contractor entering Administration we are terminating our contract &amp; applying for payment on materials procured &amp; works carried out to date.<br />
<br />
I know clause 60.1 would apply but unsure the exact procedure from a Sub-Contractor position.Terminationhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17059/option-procedure-contractor-terminate-contract-insolvencyFri, 15 Mar 2019 13:00:55 +0000NEC ECC: Termination for any reasonhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17054/nec-ecc-termination-for-any-reason
Clause 90.1 of &nbsp;the NEC 3 ECC Contact allows an Employer to terminate for any reason. Are there any requirements that they must do so in good faith etc? Or can it be at will for for any reason at all even if it is unfair to the Contractor?Terminationhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17054/nec-ecc-termination-for-any-reasonWed, 13 Mar 2019 20:13:54 +0000NEC ECS: Can costs be claimed back under 25.2 for poor performancehttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17053/nec-ecs-can-costs-claimed-back-under-25-for-poor-performance
We have a Subcontractor who has met the requirements for X5 so avoided LD's but has then dragged their feet completing the remainder of the works and one of our staff has taken over managing their close out as well as our expert in that area. Under clause 25.2 can we recover these costs as they have not completed their works in a timely manner.Generalhttps://reachback.builtintelligence.com/17053/nec-ecs-can-costs-claimed-back-under-25-for-poor-performanceWed, 13 Mar 2019 17:31:47 +0000